BFE Critical Writing Review The UGA performance of Bum Fuck Egypt (BFE) utilized unique props and simplistic costumes, fantastic stage directing, and great acting as a whole to paint a vivid picture even with such a low budget. While reading it was great and definitely gave me the context, seeing it in person gave a whole new experience while also answering some questions and opening whole new ones. In terms of its overall look, I think there were only small detail things that could have been helped if the play had a bigger budget to begin with. For example, when the antagonist steals from the shop, I feel like the setting wasn't clear enough during the visual play, and therefore some may not have picked up on exactly what he was doing until a few lines later when Nancy comes back and Panny tries to explain what happened. Speaking of setting, the overall color scheme of everything seemed a bit dull. Although, for the most part, this is supposed to set a rather dark story and setting, the low lit stage and all dark colored props made things a bit hard to make out and clearly visualize. I don’t mean to be harsh in anyway. I think that this play didn't really need a budget to tell its story, and the final product actually has me thinking that any play could be produced budget-less if it were to have enough creativity put in and actors willing to perform more with less. Of course this is college and not everyone is experienced to a professional level, so I believe that the actors did a great job overall; however, there were definitely some characters who seemed to fit their role to a “T”. In particular, I was impressed with Hugo’s character, who was able to articulate his voice over the phone with Panny with such ease and mannerisms unique to himself. I think that without Hugo's body language and behavior, his lines may not have been as funny as they were. I personally thought Evvie’s character was also casted rather well. She spoke her lines with a rhythm that didn’t bore, even though one of Evvie’s character traits is to talk so much that she talks off someone’s ear (as she tells Lefty he is very patient to listen to everything she was talking about the first time they met). Taking into account that it was a no/low-budget play, the costume design actually weren’t too bad. Each character's wardrobe directly resembled their personalities: Evvie in a flashy, flowy, and sassy (yet subdued) outfit and Isabelle in a robe. Although simplistic, it got the point across very quickly. The one thing I found somewhat oversimplified was that The Man was wearing a trench coat, which almost seemed a bit too cliché and stereotypical for this situation. On the other hand, I personally would not be sure what outfit would be the best fit for him. Along with costume design comes the consideration of props used within the play. To begin, the UGA interpretation actually doesn’t start with Panny talking, but instead had several doctors pointing flashlights at a body (which appears to be dead, but could also be in reference to Panny and Isabel’s cosmetic surgeries. This really gave the environment a morbid tone and made audience better understand the magnitude of the situation as this scene is followed by Panny talking about everything. Another prop I found interesting was the phones. Whether conscious or not, the director gave Panny and Hugo phones with cords, which set the time era while also showing the audience that they were bound to the houses they lived in in order to communicate. This ruled out the option for Panny to call anyone for help and brought to light the theme of communication in different forms. One last prop I wanted to point out was the TV. Along with backupsound, the TV really came to life as a center point for the sedentary lifeIsabel lives. Its main debut, in my opinion, is with the very last scene, whenthe stage is mainly illuminated by its eerie glow and the ringing phone whichends the show. The director led this small group of actors into creating a piece of work that both physically (there were members of the audience by me gasping and whispering to themselves during the play) and emotionally immersed audience members into the plot. One particular note I’d like to say towards the director is that, although blocking was well done and allowed for all sides of the audience to feel involved, the distance between stage and viewers made some things more difficult to decipher than others. Such as, when the characters Lefty and Evvie were sitting in the back or Hugo would walk to the back as he talked on the phone, it made it much more difficult to see exactly what was going on. Especially since Lefty and Evvie were on a date in a loud restaurant, that made hearing more difficult too. That being said, I thought the choice to leave Panny and The Man sitting in the background as other scenes commenced made for a very ominous detail. It reminded the audience that, as everything else was going on, Panny was in this awful situation and that this was something that happened under everyone’s noses. This was a great touch. I'm unsure if it is because I’m hearing the lines again or if it's because visually seeing it helps, but I definitely feel like I noticed things when watching the play that I had not gathered from reading it first. The ending, in specific, seemed much more sinister while watching it. I think it is due to the scene when Panny’s pen pal comes out to try and “cheer up” everyone right after everyone finds out about Panny. I guess my more monotone voice I had while reading it didn't stand out as much as the very peppy, go lucky Hue-Yoon. Overall, the theater department for UGA created a great play and seemed to have a good turnout. The director makes use of lighting, sound, props, and the actors themselves in order to produce a play even without a budget to begin with. Other plays I’ve seen without initial budgets, such as the UGA theater department Animal Farm, still approach the play differently compared to that of BFE. In all, it brings out a wonderful individuality to an already well made play.
The UGA performance of Bum Fuck Egypt (BFE) utilized unique props and simplistic costumes, fantastic stage directing, and great acting as a whole to paint a vivid picture even with such a low budget. While reading it was great and definitely gave me the context, seeing it in person gave a whole new experience while also answering some questions and opening whole new ones.
In terms of its overall look, I think there were only small detail things that could have been helped if the play had a bigger budget to begin with. For example, when the antagonist steals from the shop, I feel like the setting wasn't clear enough during the visual play, and therefore some may not have picked up on exactly what he was doing until a few lines later when Nancy comes back and Panny tries to explain what happened. Speaking of setting, the overall color scheme of everything seemed a bit dull.
Although, for the most part, this is supposed to set a rather dark story and setting, the low lit stage and all dark colored props made things a bit hard to make out and clearly visualize. I don’t mean to be harsh in anyway. I think that this play didn't really need a budget to tell its story, and the final product actually has me thinking that any play could be produced budget-less if it were to have enough creativity put in and actors willing to perform more with less.
Of course this is college and not everyone is experienced to a professional level, so I believe that the actors did a great job overall; however, there were definitely some characters who seemed to fit their role to a “T”. In particular, I was impressed with Hugo’s character, who was able to articulate his voice over the phone with Panny with such ease and mannerisms unique to himself. I think that without Hugo's body language and behavior, his lines may not have been as funny as they were. I personally thought Evvie’s character was also casted rather well. She spoke her lines with a rhythm that didn’t bore, even though one of Evvie’s character traits is to talk so much that she talks off someone’s ear (as she tells Lefty he is very patient to listen to everything she was talking about the first time they met).
Taking into account that it was a no/low-budget play, the costume design actually weren’t too bad. Each character's wardrobe directly resembled their personalities: Evvie in a flashy, flowy, and sassy (yet subdued) outfit and Isabelle in a robe. Although simplistic, it got the point across very quickly. The one thing I found somewhat oversimplified was that The Man was wearing a trench coat, which almost seemed a bit too cliché and stereotypical for this situation. On the other hand, I personally would not be sure what outfit would be the best fit for him.
Along with costume design comes the consideration of props used within the play. To begin, the UGA interpretation actually doesn’t start with Panny talking, but instead had several doctors pointing flashlights at a body (which appears to be dead, but could also be in reference to Panny and Isabel’s cosmetic surgeries. This really gave the environment a morbid tone and made audience better understand the magnitude of the situation as this scene is followed by Panny talking about everything. Another prop I found interesting was the phones. Whether conscious or not, the director gave Panny and Hugo phones with cords, which set the time era while also showing the audience that they were bound to the houses they lived in in order to communicate. This ruled out the option for Panny to call anyone for help and brought to light the theme of communication in different forms. One last prop I wanted to point out was the TV. Along with backupsound, the TV really came to life as a center point for the sedentary lifeIsabel lives. Its main debut, in my opinion, is with the very last scene, whenthe stage is mainly illuminated by its eerie glow and the ringing phone whichends the show.
The director led this small group of actors into creating a piece of work that both physically (there were members of the audience by me gasping and whispering to themselves during the play) and emotionally immersed audience members into the plot. One particular note I’d like to say towards the director is that, although blocking was well done and allowed for all sides of the audience to feel involved, the distance between stage and viewers made some things more difficult to decipher than others. Such as, when the characters Lefty and Evvie were sitting in the back or Hugo would walk to the back as he talked on the phone, it made it much more difficult to see exactly what was going on. Especially since Lefty and Evvie were on a date in a loud restaurant, that made hearing more difficult too. That being said, I thought the choice to leave Panny and The Man sitting in the background as other scenes commenced made for a very ominous detail. It reminded the audience that, as everything else was going on, Panny was in this awful situation and that this was something that happened under everyone’s noses. This was a great touch.
I'm unsure if it is because I’m hearing the lines again or if it's because visually seeing it helps, but I definitely feel like I noticed things when watching the play that I had not gathered from reading it first. The ending, in specific, seemed much more sinister while watching it. I think it is due to the scene when Panny’s pen pal comes out to try and “cheer up” everyone right after everyone finds out about Panny. I guess my more monotone voice I had while reading it didn't stand out as much as the very peppy, go lucky Hue-Yoon.
Overall, the theater department for UGA created a great play and seemed to have a good turnout. The director makes use of lighting, sound, props, and the actors themselves in order to produce a play even without a budget to begin with. Other plays I’ve seen without initial budgets, such as the UGA theater department Animal Farm, still approach the play differently compared to that of BFE. In all, it brings out a wonderful individuality to an already well made play.